Rusty Accord
Well-Known Member
It's often been said that the cheapest car to own is the car you own. Given that I own this one, I'll be repairing it.
The good news so far though is that so long as I start off in [2], the car seems to be okay. So long as second gear doesn't die, at least I can drive it.
My decision is based off of the uncertainty that another car with a cost of less than $1,000 brings with it, namely the probability that there are other problems just waiting to (or have already come to) surface. I've had some pretty good luck with low dollar used cars, but most of them needed something before they were road worthy in terms of parts and labour. In this case, I know what it needs, and I have a pretty good handle on the condition of the rest of the vehicle. It's not great, but it's manageable.
I'm curious about the difference between the '98-'99 transmission, and the '00-'02 one. I see that they're different, and there are some differences pointed out in the FSM, but not with the electronics. I don't seem to have found any differences in how it connects into the car, or connects to the electronics. Axles, shift linkage, and bolt mounting all seem to be described the same, just some differences with parts that need to be moved to drop the transmission.
If they did something better with the newer transmissions, it might be worth investigating, but I don't think that I'll take the chance. I'll grab a transmission from one of the same year if there's a good candidate, or from a '98 if that one seems better. I still think I'm probably okay if I stick to cars that look like they were scrapped from being hit.
Yeah, I don't know what the difference is either. It might be line pressures or something like that, that the ECU is looking for. It could even be shift points, so that the car gets into high gear sooner for fuel mileage. I just don't know. It's also what brought me to 6th gen in the first place (learning about the AT).